Radeon PRO W7900 vs Mobility HD 5870
Aggregated performance score
PRO W7900 outperforms Mobility HD 5870 by a whopping 2453% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 739 | 11 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.07 | 7.37 |
Architecture | Terascale 2 (2009−2015) | RDNA 3.0 (2022) |
GPU code name | Broadway-XT | Navi 31 |
Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
Release date | 7 January 2010 (14 years ago) | 13 April 2023 (1 year ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $3,999 |
Current price | $108 | $4649 (1.2x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
PRO W7900 has 589% better value for money than ATI Mobility HD 5870.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
Pipelines / CUDA cores | 800 | 6144 |
Core clock speed | 700 MHz | no data |
Boost clock speed | no data | 2495 MHz |
Number of transistors | 1,040 million | 57,700 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 5 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 295 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 28.00 | 958.1 |
Floating-point performance | 1,120.0 gflops | no data |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on Mobility Radeon HD 5870 and Radeon PRO W7900 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
Laptop size | large | no data |
Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
Length | no data | 280 mm |
Width | no data | 3-slot |
Supplementary power connectors | no data | 2x 8-pin |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
Memory type | DDR3, GDDR3, GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 48 GB |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | 18 GB/s |
Memory bandwidth | 64 GB/s | 864.0 GB/s |
Shared memory | - | no data |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
Display Connectors | No outputs | 3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
Shader Model | 5.0 | 6.7 |
OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.2 |
Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
900p | 31
−2319%
| 750−800
+2319%
|
Full HD | 39
−2336%
| 950−1000
+2336%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
−2400%
|
150−160
+2400%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 4−5
−2400%
|
100−105
+2400%
|
Battlefield 5 | 6−7
−2400%
|
150−160
+2400%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 12−14
−2400%
|
300−310
+2400%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
−2400%
|
150−160
+2400%
|
Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−2400%
|
100−105
+2400%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 4−5
−2400%
|
100−105
+2400%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−2400%
|
200−210
+2400%
|
Hitman 3 | 6−7
−2400%
|
150−160
+2400%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 5−6
−2300%
|
120−130
+2300%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
−2400%
|
150−160
+2400%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 9−10
−2344%
|
220−230
+2344%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 4−5
−2400%
|
100−105
+2400%
|
Battlefield 5 | 6−7
−2400%
|
150−160
+2400%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 12−14
−2400%
|
300−310
+2400%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
−2400%
|
150−160
+2400%
|
Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−2400%
|
100−105
+2400%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 4−5
−2400%
|
100−105
+2400%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−2400%
|
200−210
+2400%
|
Hitman 3 | 6−7
−2400%
|
150−160
+2400%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 5−6
−2300%
|
120−130
+2300%
|
Metro Exodus | 4−5
−2400%
|
100−105
+2400%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
−2400%
|
150−160
+2400%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 9−10
−2344%
|
220−230
+2344%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−2329%
|
170−180
+2329%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 4−5
−2400%
|
100−105
+2400%
|
Battlefield 5 | 6−7
−2400%
|
150−160
+2400%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
−2400%
|
150−160
+2400%
|
Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−2400%
|
100−105
+2400%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 4−5
−2400%
|
100−105
+2400%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−2400%
|
200−210
+2400%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−2329%
|
170−180
+2329%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
1440p
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 5−6
−2300%
|
120−130
+2300%
|
Hitman 3 | 6−7
−2400%
|
150−160
+2400%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 9−10
−2344%
|
220−230
+2344%
|
Metro Exodus | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 6−7
−2400%
|
150−160
+2400%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−2300%
|
120−130
+2300%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
4K
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
Hitman 3 | 3−4
−2400%
|
75−80
+2400%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 7−8
−2329%
|
170−180
+2329%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−2400%
|
100−105
+2400%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 6−7
−2400%
|
150−160
+2400%
|
This is how ATI Mobility HD 5870 and PRO W7900 compete in popular games:
- PRO W7900 is 2319% faster in 900p
- PRO W7900 is 2336% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 2.95 | 75.31 |
Recency | 7 January 2010 | 13 April 2023 |
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 48 GB |
Chip lithography | 40 nm | 5 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 295 Watt |
The Radeon PRO W7900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 5870 in performance tests.
Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 5870 is a notebook card while Radeon PRO W7900 is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.